A federal judge has granted a motion for litigation about the state’s sex offense act to enter final judgment.
Parts of Michigan’s Sex Offense Registration Act (SORA) were ruled unconstitutional by U.S. District Court Judge Robert Cleland on Feb. 14, 2020. The litigation has been ongoing for nine years.
Due to the coronavirus pandemic, the court delayed the final judgment in April 2020.
The court held a retroactive punishment of the 2011 amendments to SORA can not be served. Several other SORA provisions were found unconstitutional for people who were convicted before the 2011 amendment was enacted.
The Michigan Legislature passed Public Act 295 on Dec. 31, 2020, also known as “new SORA,” which addresses constitutional issues the court found in the registry. This act went into effect on March 24.
The court determined possible future prosecution for violations of the old SORA statute requires the entry of a final judgment, even though the judgment will not affect the enforcement of the new SORA statute enacted in March 2021.
The court concluded that the new version of SORA applies only to registrants’ conduct on or after March 24.
While plaintiffs of the litigation argue new SORA also has unconstitutional provisions and makes the law more unclear, challenges to the new version will need to be addressed in a separate lawsuit.
Plaintiffs must submit a joint, proposed form of judgment by July 12.
“Consequently, the court concludes that the new version of SORA applies only to registrants’ conduct on or after March 24, 2021.”
WOW! Does this mean that anyone whose offense in Michigan occurred prior to 3/24/2021 does not have to register anymore???
I am a reasonably intelligent person. In the interest of staying out of prison, I tend to abide by the rules. These idiots have made it so complex that a reasonably intelligent person can not possibly understand what to do and what not to do. It has to be by design. They want every plausible means of a prosecutor to be able to prosecute us. Gray area, unclear, open to interpretation type laws serve no other purpose. This snails pace of changing these rules is stressful
So now I guess there will have to be another lawsuit because even though the Court ruled the retroactive application of lifetime registration to be a violation of the ex post facto clause, Michigan did NOTHING to change it.
This entire lawsuit was nothing but a joke. I don’t give a damn about the school safety zones, telephones, email addresses, internet identifiers. My beef was that there was NO registry when I was convicted, but I was placed on it anyway for 25 years, then the 2011 change in the law retroactively punished me by forcing me to register for LIFE!!!
We are all going to die before we see this change.
How can it be legal for the Michigan’s legislature to pass laws based on something being in litigation? Sounds like they act like superheroes; while they really are power hungry tripping fools.
Ok Guys and Gals, maybe I’m just an idiot,and my comprehensive skills suck, but can any one please explain to me in laymens terms, what this actually means. The court held a retroactive punishment of the 2011 amendments to SORA can not be served. Several other SORA provisions were found unconstitutional for people who were convicted before the 2011 amendment was enacted. Thank you all in advance.
This is how I understand this. The 2011 and 2006 Laws are unconstitutional and Connor be severed. We are left with the 2020 law, but retroactive application is NOT applicable at this time. The new 2020 law does not clarify if it’s retroactive and even if it did, it becomes a problem due to Michigan law. Still looks like Michigan will have to further clarify the new law if possible. Just my take.
Channel 5 WNEM just reported pre 2011 registry to be taken down ,
MSP is considering!
WNEM channel 5 just reported,
Pre 2011 register is unconstitutional and will be removed, MSP is working on it. ???
Thanks Detroit
Ok, maybe I just don’t understand this I watched the video and read the article from channel 5, yes it says that the 2011 amendment can’t be applied to those of us that are pre-2006 and 2011 or even pre- 95 like my self, but it didn’t say anything about removing us from the registry. Did I miss something or not comprehend something in the video or article. Any clarification about what this means would be greatly appreciated. Thank you.
Let’s see if I am understanding this correctly; After 9 years of fighting this law, it is ruled unconstitutional. So, the state just passes another law that is basically the same as the first one. Now they say we have to start a separate lawsuit that will likely take another 9 years to be decided, just so the state can pass yet another law that is basically the same as the first two. This is some serious bull. Why even bother fighting this if that is what will happen?
The court held a retroactive punishment of the 2011 amendments to SORA can not be served. Several other SORA provisions were found unconstitutional for people who were convicted before the 2011 amendment was enacted.
My point is,
How can anyone ANYONE
know what the judge is going to do? Tim, you, ME, or WNEM channel 5 !
at the top of this article, it is pulled from network tv,
1 more thing, I have never trolled anyone and I will not be associated with anyone or group that allows trolling
Hello all,
As an offender myself, convicted in 91, did a yr and half. I was suddenly placed on registry in 94. Level one. suddenly in 2006 and 2011 I was moved to tier 3. I couldn’t believe it.
I want to share some insights here as I have faced Judge Cleland 3 different times as a plaintiff in a lawsuit ( against Insurance company not paying accident claim because I was a sex offender).. He sided with me and forced insurance to pay, with interest.
I come from a family of law enforcement, state reps, and a couple lawyers….I was the black sheep that got into trouble. Never the less I hold 2 degrees.
What I wanted to point out is Judge Cleland is very fair. His heart is imbeded in the constitution, you won’t get him to stray from it. That said, he is a believer if you do the crime, you do the time. However he is against life time of being on registry. He doesn’t approve of that one bit. He is a believer of second chances. But he views it it a fine tooth comb.
I told Tim back in march when new law ( new sora) took affect, not to throw towel in just yet, judge Cleland does not like the new law, the new Sora. He will rule in our favor. Of course he didn’t believe me, and shot that down as not possible. But I have inside ( behind the grape vine) input from those that know, work around and deal with Cleland, the State police, prosecutors and that. Most are heavily confused of the wording associated with the new Sora. Many counties are sitting back waiting for the final ruling, and have been long before New Sora, and many are not following the New Sora to the key.
I recently had the privilege of sitting down with a county prosecutor during lunch time and having a discussion. ( getting my gun rights restore, which I’m eligible for in Michigan according to prosecutor). We got on the subject of my past felony, and being on registry. He doesn’t like the new registry and claims many officers and staff find it difficult to follow, and confused if not very vague.
One thing very interesting, is the new Sora’s wording ( read very very carefully through it) does NOT mention or indicate it being retroactive, nor recapture. That alone will work in our favor. Watch closely in coming days and months ( on new suit) how that gets addressed. If and how judge Cleland rules final judgement, and add improvisions to it. For example if indeed the pre-2011 are unconstitutional, and is ruled as such, it can’t be carried over to new Sora.
The new suit on New Sora will address all other issues. That’s how a few top brass explained it to me. With South Carolina supreme court ruling final judgement that life time registry is unconstitutional, and two other states following suit. There’s going to be a big chain reaction to happen….watch and learn.
Also as prosecutor was saying, when registry came out, there was like 5-6 hundred hits a day to it. Now your lucky to get 20-30 a week. No one pays attention to it nor cares about it anymore…Bottom line it doesn’t work and serves no useful purpose anymore. Also a key factor in our fight.
Thanks
It is evident to me that most of you do not know what “Final Judgement” means. This is not where the Judge rules. This case has already been decided. It’s over. The final judgement is the last step before closing the case. It’s where the judge writes his summary spelling out his decision and how it will be enforced and the clerk files it away.Case closed. No more ruling on this case will happen.
Hi All,
Want to clarify something so that there is an understanding of what’s really happening here. Many think that Cleland made final judgement back March 2020. That was merely a final Judgement brief/Opinion, not the entry. And that the New revised Sora didn’t address what he entered….
Let’s clear that up…
In that order Cleland also addressed….
“To be clear:
SORA will not become unenforceable as of the date of this order. Rather,
the holdings in this opinion will become effective and enforceable only after the entry of a final judgment , at the time specified in that final judgment….”
This means sora was and remains enforceable to this day in some ways to a point, and state moved quickly to revise the new sora revision, leaving intact most of it anyway. Because of pandemic, this final order entry was delayed for over a year.
The final judgement entry is coming, and may be upheld.
Another issue that didn’t get a lot of focus and may be why there will be another lawsuit is….
At the hearing, the parties agreed that the 2006 amendments were severable.
The court’s analysis like the parties’ briefs will focus on the severability of the 2011 amendments because if the 2011 amendments cannot be severed, SORA cannot apply to any members of the ex post facto subclasses, including registrants whose crimes subjecting them to registration were committed before the enactment of the 2006 amendments.
See infra
Part IV.
A.3.
Upon the entry of final judgment in this case, Defendants will be
permanently enjoined from enforcing any provision of SORA against members of the ex post facto subclasses and will be permanently enjoined from enforcing the provisions described in Part III.B of this opinion against any
registrant. ( this is if his final opinion is upheld and signed as final entry.)
.
( Important Note here).. 1) That was not final judgement, it’s was the judges opinion towards final judgement entry. Upon entry … means it hasn’t yet been entered by final judgement ..Yet. The state can do what ever it likes until that entry.
Also… regarding the 2011 amendments
The plaintiff’s didn’t address this thoroughly. They did 2006, And Legislation took it upon themselves to leave it intact when revising the new sora.
BUT…. this can be addressed and modified in final judgement entry. Or addressed in new lawsuit if not modified.
You see, what the Michigan Legislators did was align the Sora with the National Model …SORNA. And the court knew Legislation would try and do this.
I sent this to the wrong article earlier but i email Paul R, with a few questions about the the final order, and this is what i got back if anyone is interested.
Thanks for your note. Quick answers are below. Everything is tied to the fact that the state passed a new SORA (which became effective 3/24/21).
1. The Does II judgment will say that people like you cannot be prosecuted for any SORA compliance violation from 4/12/11 to 3/23/21 because SORA was unconstitutional during that time as applied retroactively to you. Since the statute of limitations is 6 years on such criminal liability, this is good news, as it means any violation for the past 6 years can no longer be prosecuted.
2. You likely are covered by the new law (SORA 2021) and you should have recently gotten a notice in the mail describing it and your new duties under it. The Sixth Circuit ruled that the old law was unconstitutional, but never said that people must come off the registry — unless the state fails to pass a new law that resolves the constitutional defects. The state’s position is that the new law, which is very similar to the federal SORNA and which has mostly been held to be constitutional, now passes constitutional muster.
3. We agree with you that the new law is so like the old law that the courts should still hold it to be unconstitutional. But because the state removed a few of the worst provisions — the school zones, strict liability for any violation (willful or not), the duty to report phones, emails, and cars “routinely” used (whatever that meant) — we could have a harder time persuading a court that the new law, too, rises to the level of punishment.
Nevertheless, we are working up a new global class action challenge to SORA 2021. We are right now gathering expert reports, coming up with new legal claims, and we have recruited the plaintiffs from Does I and Does II to serve as named plaintiffs in Does III. We expect to file the new case in the fall — we were delayed first because we did not want to file Does III until Does II was fully resolved, and because it takes forever to get experts to come on board and to prepare what we need to file the new case.
Our goal is to reduce the time people must serve on the registry, and to tie it to individualized assessment of current risk. We know that most sex offenders will never commit a second offense, and after 10 years most people on the registry pose no higher risk of committing a new sex offense than non-sex offenders are, and indeed most are no higher risk than males in the general population.
If the court certifies the case as a class action then you will be a class member. Many people believed that Does II would get them off the registry. We thought that would occur through a negotiated new law, with reasonable duration requirements and a clear path off for those who were low risk. But the legislature rammed through the new law in the lame duck session, and it is almost as bad as the old law. Even the named plaintiffs who came off the registry in Does I (as part of a negotiated judgment) will themselves go back on the registry now under SORA 2021.
This may not be what you want to hear, but I trust it answers your questions.
Best wishes and good luck.
PDR
https://all4consolaws.org/2021/06/mi-lawsuit-against-states-sex-offender-registry-act-enters-final-judgment/comment-page-1/#comment-272569
Im a per 2011 my was 2008 and im still held nothing new just the school zone being removed and from what I keep being told is (Kent county) they only doing what the state police are telling them wean talking to the state pd they say something different. As I know Kent will not comply to anything unless its removed.
Thanks for your note. Quick answers are below. Everything is tied to the fact that the state passed a new SORA (which became effective 3/24/21).
1. The Does II judgment will say that people like you cannot be prosecuted for any SORA compliance violation from 4/12/11 to 3/23/21 because SORA was unconstitutional during that time as applied retroactively to you. Since the statute of limitations is 6 years on such criminal liability, this is good news, as it means any violation for the past 6 years can no longer be prosecuted.
2. You likely are covered by the new law (SORA 2021) and you should have recently gotten a notice in the mail describing it and your new duties under it. The Sixth Circuit ruled that the old law was unconstitutional, but never said that people must come off the registry — unless the state fails to pass a new law that resolves the constitutional defects. The state’s position is that the new law, which is very similar to the federal SORNA and which has mostly been held to be constitutional, now passes constitutional muster.
3. We agree with you that the new law is so like the old law that the courts should still hold it to be unconstitutional. But because the state removed a few of the worst provisions — the school zones, strict liability for any violation (willful or not), the duty to report phones, emails, and cars “routinely” used (whatever that meant) — we could have a harder time persuading a court that the new law, too, rises to the level of punishment.
Nevertheless, we are working up a new global class action challenge to SORA 2021. We are right now gathering expert reports, coming up with new legal claims, and we have recruited the plaintiffs from Does I and Does II to serve as named plaintiffs in Does III. We expect to file the new case in the fall — we were delayed first because we did not want to file Does III until Does II was fully resolved, and because it takes forever to get experts to come on board and to prepare what we need to file the new case.
Our goal is to reduce the time people must serve on the registry, and to tie it to individualized assessment of current risk. We know that most sex offenders will never commit a second offense, and after 10 years most people on the registry pose no higher risk of committing a new sex offense than non-sex offenders are, and indeed most are no higher risk than males in the general population.
If the court certifies the case as a class action then you will be a class member. Many people believed that Does II would get them off the registry. We thought that would occur through a negotiated new law, with reasonable duration requirements and a clear path off for those who were low risk. But the legislature rammed through the new law in the lame duck session, and it is almost as bad as the old law. Even the named plaintiffs who came off the registry in Does I (as part of a negotiated judgment) will themselves go back on the registry now under SORA 2021.
This may not be what you want to hear, but I trust it answers your questions.
Best wishes and good luck
Google “sex offender protests courthouse”, and you will see how far I am willing go to defend myself… right down to public humiliation… and now that I am warrant free… nationwide… I can and will do it again…
And what did judge Clealand say if they didn’t bring it into compliance?
If my memory serves me ,,,,,,,,
o People whose offenses occurred before April 12, 2011, cannot be subjected to the 2011 amendments, ( which retroactively extended many individuals’ registration terms to life,) classified registrants by tiers, and imposed extensive reporting requirements.
So Congress has NOT done what was ordered .
Apparently congress cannot separate the unconstitutional parts of sora from sora? Just as the aclu pointed out so long ago,,,,,
What happens when you don’t comply with a judge’s order?
Any word from Judge cleeland today?
I just read the email from intern,
Line 6 , and the next paragraph under it,,,,,,
That just left me confused?
As,I am a person who all sorts of case law because I was wanting to be a attorney before I was stupid.
This reads to me as ALL PRE-2011 registrants Don’t Need To Register because SORA was deemed unconstitutional .
Since Judge Cleland was supposed to write the final order in this case on Monday, July 19, 2021, what was his decision and how has it changed anything at this point? Has it even been published for public access yet?
I have tons of questions but no definitive answers.
I personally beleive we should be compensated for the states punishment of us.
My instant offense was in 1987, yes 1987.
I should be compensated for everyday that i was wrongfully punished.
I have even been convicted of 6 violation, and thanks to my attorney’s might, only served probation.
We are owed millions.
Time for class attorneys to fight for punitive damages.
[Moderators note: Do not type in all uppercase. I converted this one but will delete the next all caps comment]
Doe’s 3 is getting ready to be filed. will be filed any time now. will include everyone on registry with emphases on the pre 2011 issue of registrants. It will challenge the new sora and it’s mess it still creates. So keep a watch out for this.
For those of you wanting to get an attorney and use Bett’s case to get off the registry. I would strongly advise against it. One, you’ll dump at least $20,000 into it. Yes I check long back. 3-5 thou to start and $250 an hour plus all fees.
trust me don’t do it. Second, if you lose the case, the state will have a legal weapon to use against Doe’s 3 and will affect everyone on it.
Remember , power is in Numbers. Such as a class action. Go it alone, it’s you against many in state legislators. Your chance is very slim.
Let the ACLU and the lawyers do their job…they’ll get it done. It’s coming, I know many are disappointed in last couple cases and feel we accomplished nothing. No one said this was going to be easy at all. But never the less they were both excellent wins. It’s just the state ( as sneaky as the bastards are) was a step ahead of us in getting the new Sora out. The ACLU could not do anything about it because this all happened in lame duck session with no input or outside views. All because of the pandemic. This won’t happen again.
Just think how close we almost won the whole thing. if there was no pandemic,
the final decision would have taken us off long before the legislators had chance to push new Sora through….think about that a minute. That’s how close we were. It will be right this time around.